Forum:Party Infobox Change
Forums: Index > Administrative Discussions > Here, we will discuss whether or not to remove "Intelligence Level" from political parties' infoboxes. I oppose the change. This wiki is meant to be biased and there's nothing wrong with a little fun. 01:39, June 1, 2012 (UTC) While this wiki was plainly meant to be biased in support of conservatism against its various detractors, insults aren't needed for one to hold to conservatism, at least if one genuinely believes one has the intellectual higher ground. Not only do insults scare away former liberal and moderate inquirers from becoming interested in conservatism and thus reducing the Republican Party's chances of support unnecessarily thereby, it also pushes away those conservatives who hold themselves to a higher standard by "dirtying the waters with childishness". As a political moderate myself, I'd prefer the less flattering parts of the wiki be reduced in scope if it doesn't harm the conservative position, and this definitely seems to be one of those cases. Toph's Fanboy, 02:08, June 1, 2012 (UTC) While I think Toph's Fanboy was wrong to change something as fundamental as a heading in an infobox without speaking to anyone, I agree with the change. Omashu Rocks, you've created an excellent site, and I'm not questioning your style, but I think I know why you included "Intelligence Level". Is it possible that you did not expect this wiki to be taken seriously when you first made it? Maybe you were just trying to have fun and be humorous, much like our rival, Liberapedia. For those who do not know, Liberapedia contains almost no substantial information and is almost 100% insults, including the use of swearing and other inappropriate attacks. Humor can be a good thing. For example, we can use humor to make a point (satire). However, as Toph's Fanboy said, this kind of insult may deter possible swing-voters. 02:16, June 1, 2012 (UTC) I don't like the sound of political correctness ruining the spirit of this wiki. I just saw how you (Toph's Fanboy) altered the part of Democratic Party that talks about marriage. I don't see anything wrong with the way it was. "Either they don't read the dictionary," made me chuckle a bit, and I think it's a creative way to get the point across. Even if we do change this infobox thing, can we please tone down the PC just a bit. Let's have a little fun! 03:05, June 1, 2012 (UTC) :: Sorry about that, Mama Grizzly. That one point on marriage used to be three points, and so the exact way it was worded the last time before the latest edit was mine also, but it didn't really match up to how I would normally word the matter and made me feel uncomfortable about the whole thing. You can change it back if you want; I just don't want to be responsible for wording it that way (and I did emphasize the fact that the way they're trying to define marriage has been unheard of in all of history!). I'll try not to ruin the fun of the conservatives on this site, and if that's how most people feel about the infobox change, just vote against it and don't worry about accomadating me. Toph's Fanboy, 03:12, June 1, 2012 (UTC) :::I think we can reach an agreement. I propose we make the change to the Infobox and establish a committee responsible for judging what is fun and can stay vs. what is inappropriate and should be changed. It could be a User Group and the first tax could be the marriage thing. 04:10, June 1, 2012 (UTC) :::Sounds workable to me; Mama Grizzly? Toph's Fanboy 04:13, June 1, 2012 (UTC) :::: I like the idea. Perhaps Toph's Fanboy and I could co-head it. BTW, I didn't mean to come off as harsh earlier, but I did. Sorry. 04:17, June 1, 2012 (UTC) I don't think other users are going to join the discussion, and I see no reason to debate this any further. Have we reached an agreement? Omashu Rocks (talk - ) 04:29, June 1, 2012 (UTC) Hold your horses Omashu Rocks. I haven't voiced my opinion yet... BUT I think we should change it like everyone else so I guess that doesn't matter. Oxybot 04:32, June 1, 2012 (UTC) Yep. From the above discussion, it looks like we've managed a workable compromise and decided the outcome of the original question: No "Intelligence" section in the Party's infobox. (And I'm pretty sure anyone else who looked it over would agree with me on that). Toph's Fanboy 04:33, June 1, 2012 (UTC) What do you think about co-leading the committee with Grizzly? 04:54, June 1, 2012 (UTC) I'd take the position, though I'm not entirely sure what I supposed to do once I'm there. If you could explain what would be involved in co-leading the committee, either here or on my talk page, I'd be very thankful. Toph's Fanboy 05:04, June 1, 2012 (UTC) I guess you could make a User Group for it and have a section where people come to you with a concern about something being too insulting/inappropriate, then the members of the group would discuss it… I'd be happy to join as you can be on 3 groups 05:24, June 1, 2012 (UTC) Here I made a prototype user group. 16:28, June 1, 2012 (UTC)